I don't think he's mental. I think it's a strategy not unlike the political strategy of slinging mud. Your opponent can wipe it off, but some of it sticks. You are not trying t converth heathens. You are trying to give your own troops something to cheer about.

It's obvious that creationists scroll past science the same way we scroll past BA77. You only pay attention to your own side.

But the standard of evidence for apologetics does't overlap with the stand of evidence for science. So there will never be any actual communication.

I don't think he's mental. I think it's a strategy not unlike the political strategy of slinging mud. Your opponent can wipe it off, but some of it sticks. You are not trying t converth heathens. You are trying to give your own troops something to cheer about.

It's obvious that creationists scroll past science the same way we scroll past BA77. You only pay attention to your own side.

But the standard of evidence for apologetics does't overlap with the stand of evidence for science. So there will never be any actual communication.

I just had a eureka moment. All this nonsense Hunter has been pouring at us makes sense when you realize that he is not speaking to you (the evilutionist). He is talking to an invisible audience of students at Biola.

My theory is that Hunter is working on another book and he allows the "evolutionists" to comment on his crazy rants in order to analyze potential counter-arguments and develop counter-counter-arguments. It's obvious that he is not interested in dialogue.

--------------After much reflection I finally realized that the best way to describe the cause of the universe is: the great I AM.

My theory is that Hunter is working on another book and he allows the "evolutionists" to comment on his crazy rants in order to analyze potential counter-arguments and develop counter-counter-arguments. It's obvious that he is not interested in dialogue.

I agree. I once tried to suggest an analogy to the movie Groundhog Day, but teknickle problems failed me:This blog reads like a real life version of Groundhog Day. CH wakes up and thinks "Aha - today I shall smash the theory of evolution!". He then proceeds to write a Devastating Article, only to see his arguments shredded in the comments. The next day CH wakes up and thinks "Aha - today I shall smash the theory of evolution!"...

Perhaps he does learn a little each time, if only to somehow improve his performance for the next post, as in the movie. Maybe he is working toward the day when he gets it just right; the mainstream scientific world will collectively say "He's got us there, we're calling it a day" and bow to cdesign proponentsism.

However I've got news for CH - that day's never going to come. Maybe, though, just maybe, one day Cornelius will wake up and think "Hmm - maybe mainstream science has got it right - I'll look into it", but I'm not holding my breath.

--------------We no longer say: â€śAnother day; another bad day for Darwinism.â€ť We now say: â€śAnother day since the time Darwinism was disproved.â€ť-PaV, Uncommon Descent, 19 June 2016

Creationists come back week after week with exactly the same arguments, never acknowledging anything that has been discussed before. Upright Biped will, in a week or two, go back to Elizabeth's blog and start his spiel from the beginning as if nothing went before.

He's a trained scientist, as Lizzie keeps reminding him. Deep down, he must suspect that "mainstream science" got it right. I wonder how he can look into the mirror, see a liar each morning, and then claim the moral highground over the evil materialists.

BTW, I've become allergic to the term mainstream science since I learnt what those who use it want to supplant it with.

Creationists come back week after week with exactly the same arguments, never acknowledging anything that has been discussed before. Upright Biped will, in a week or two, go back to Elizabeth's blog and start his spiel from the beginning as if nothing went before.

And find free time to generate endless quotes that can be mined by creationists.

There are quite a few creationist/Id proponents with whom it's fruitless to engage (not that it can't still be fun. And it can help to sharpen up one's arguments). I think it was Lennie Flank who said something about watchful waiting till the next round of legal issues. Monitoring with the occasional prod to check current activity seems a good approach.

Sorry, comments are tricky and implementing a comment policy is even trickier. Most straightforward policies are all and none (i.e., allow all comments or allow no comments). We'll probably have to turn them off for awhile.

--------------Proudly banned threefour five times by Uncommon Descent.There is only one Tard. The Tard is One.

I can't understand why Hunter has chosen to close comments rather than simply suspending or banning the offender. He must know that Joe will be back as soon as comments are allowed.

I guess, to him, Joe isn't an 'offender'. I've seen the same elsewhere - people on the same 'side' as Joe tend to regard him as a lovable ragamuffin who talks much common sense. And a case could be made that Joe was not the sole cause of the thread's degeneration.

--------------SoapySam is a pathetic asswiper. Joe G

BTW, when you make little jabs like â€śI thought basic logic was one thing UDers could handle,â€ť you come off looking especially silly when you turn out to be wrong. - Barry Arrington

It occurs to me that perhaps Cornelius' tolerance of dissent is just that he hasn't figured out how to ban people.

That is possible. I don't remember him banning an individual before. Does anyone else?

My theory about his toleration of dissent is that he uses the blog as a sort of proving-ground for his arguments. In my view, Hunter is an anti-evolution propagandist. His intended audience is the sort of crowd you find at Uncommon Descent. He wants to know what goes down well with them but also what evolutionists have most difficulty countering - or appear to have most difficulty countering - and what are their best shots so that he can develop an effective reply.

Hunter is interested in science but largely from the perspective of finding whatever can be enlisted to support his religious position. The understanding he is most concerned with increasing is that of his opponents arguments with a view to gaining a tactical advantage in debates.

In his latest post, Dr Hunter very kindly provides evidence to support the hypothesis that his blog is all about anti-evolution propaganda, not science.

This time, he is denying that the observed variation in the size of finches beaks in the Galapagos Islands is evidence of Darwinian evolution. He takes the standard IDC line that it only shows that less fit populations die off, that evolution is eliminative not not creative.

Even if he disagrees with it for whatever reasons, I find highly improbable that someone with his education and intelligence does not at least understand that this is a clear case of adaptive evolution in action.

The most likely conclusion, therefore, is that he has chosen to sacrifice whatever scientific integrity he once had in the cause of attempting to discredit a scientific theory because, in his mind, it cannot be reconciled with his religious beliefs.

But it's disturbing to think someone actually thinks creationism -- having put it's hand on the hot stove every day for the last 400 years -- will get a different result tomorrow.

Dibs!

--------------"But it's disturbing to think someone actually thinks creationism -- having put it's hand on the hot stove every day for the last 400 years -- will get a different result tomorrow." -- midwifetoad

Evolution’s predictions have consistently failed and the species do not form an evolutionary tree. These are yet more manifestations of evolution’s underlying anti realism. But evolution remains a fact.

Batshit77 picked up right where he left off, with several long meaningless copypasta-fests.

Same as it ever was.

--------------"Science is what got us to the humble place weâ€™re at, and what hard-won progress we might realize comes from science, with ID completely flaccid, religious apologetics bitching from the sidelines." - Eigenstate at UD

20 bucks for the NCSE say that Joe feels far too cosy as an esteemed commenter at UD to migrate back; KF's positive feedback can't be emulated by Hunter who rarely bothers to comment once he has made the OP.

20 bucks for the NCSE say that Joe feels far too cosy as an esteemed commenter at UD to migrate back; KF's positive feedback can't be emulated by Hunter who rarely bothers to comment once he has made the OP.

You lost that one already. JoeTard is already back spouting his usual anti-science one liners.

I give him a week before his next obscenity-spewing meltdown and Corny has to disable comments again.

--------------"Science is what got us to the humble place weâ€™re at, and what hard-won progress we might realize comes from science, with ID completely flaccid, religious apologetics bitching from the sidelines." - Eigenstate at UD

Joe's getting some great quotes in over there. He even trots out the old favourite from Privileged Planet ...

Quote

“There is a final, even more bizarre twist. Because of Moon-induced tides, the Moon is gradually receding from Earth at 3.82 centimeters per year. In ten million years will seem noticeably smaller. At the same time, the Sun’s apparent girth has been swelling by six centimeters per year for ages, as is normal in stellar evolution. These two processes, working together, should end total solar eclipses in about 250 million years, a mere 5 percent of the age of the Earth. This relatively small window of opportunity also happens to coincide with the existence of intelligent life. Put another way, the most habitable place in the Solar System yields the best view of solar eclipses just when observers can best appreciate them.” "The Privileged Planet"

Humans get the best opportunity to see a solar eclipse, therefore god. Excellent.

Also ...

Quote

There is more evidence to support reincarnation and the fact that pyramids are antennas, then your position has. And I understand that bothers you.

Evidence. I do not think that word means what ... etc. If I had more characters for my sig entry I would snag that one too :-(

--------------Joe: Most criticisims of ID stem from ignorance and jealousy.Joe: As for the authors of the books in the Bible, well the OT was authored by Moses and the NT was authored by various people.Byers: The eskimo would not need hairy hair growth as hair, I say, is for keeping people dry. Not warm.